152. Actually I have said, in other threads, on this facinating topic.

In fact, I think I've responded to other OPs and posts that you have written on exactly that topic.

In summary ...

Some seem to be confused by the reality that some of the data is truly theirs, and some is not.

Social Security number is yours. Phone number is not. Content of the call is yours. Routing information is not. I could go on.

FISA court has been in existence for over 30 years. Some are now surprised by its existence. Bush wiretapped people by bypassing that court. Obama has not.

The chief justice of the supreme court has always appointed the judges.

The mining of meta data of all kinds is very common. Telecos use the data to manage and maintain their networks. City planners use similar data about automobile traffic to determine which roads to build, repair, and widen. Its also very useful for investigations after a crime is committed. Not really any different than examining bank records. Also not different from how the government monitors transfers of money above certain amounts to identify crimes in which money laundering occur.

What has been missing for a long time in all of this is greater transparency. Congress has known this, and that includes the Democratic senators you mention. So why bring it up now? Because its after the election to Obama's second term. You can actually have this debate now and have it not inadvertantly lead to a Romney Presidency.

We do not live in a police state or under a totalitarian government. That entire line of debate is silly nonsense.

Network admins have the ability to see much of your data in much the same way that your doctor knows a great deal about you. Each is expected to only use that information "for you" and not to leverage it for other uses. To do so is both unethical, and almost always illegal.